HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2015-09-22The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high‐quality, reliable
services for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting.
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town
services, programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons
with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
PROCLAMATION: October 2015 as “Conflict Resolution Month”.
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Board Representative for the Creative Arts District.
Policy Governance 3.8 Update.
Sales Tax Update.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated September 8, 2015 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated September 8, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee, September 10, 2015.
1. Elm Road Environmental Improvement Plan - Stewart Environmental
Consultants Change Order 2 & 3 - $36,500.
2. Dry Gulch Road Improvements - Farnsworth Group Change Order 1 & 2 -
$66,380.50.
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated August 19, 2015 (acknowledgement
only).
5. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated August 21, 2015 (acknowledgement only).
6. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated August 18, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
Prepared 9/14/15
*
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
2. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS (Outside Entities):
1. VISIT ESTES PARK UPDATE. – WHERE ARE WE HEADED. President & CEO
Fogarty.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION #15-15 SUPPORTING BALLOT ISSUE 4C AND 4D FOR THE
ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER. Assistant Town Administrator Machalek.
2. ORDINANCE #13-15 AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.08.010
COMMITTEES - ADDING THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AS A STANDING
COMMITTEE. Town Clerk Williamson.
3. ADJOURN.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
970.577.3705
flancaster@estes.org
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 22, 2015
TO: Board of Trustees
FROM: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
SUBJECT: INTERNAL MONITORING REPORT - EXECUTIVE LIMITATIONS
(QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT POLICY 3.3 AND 3.8)
Board Policy 2.3 designates specific reporting requirements for me to provide
information to the Board.
Reporting on Policy 3.8 Compensation and Benefits is required in September of each
year.
Policy 3.8 states: “With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to
employees, consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity.”
This report constitutes my assurance that, as reasonably interpreted, these conditions
have not occurred and further, that the data submitted below are accurate as of this
date.
________________________
Frank Lancaster
Town Administrator
3.8.1. With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity of the Town. Accordingly,
pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not change his or her own
compensation and benefits.
REPORT: I have not changed my own compensation or benefits. I am therefore
reporting compliance.
3.8.2. With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity of the Town. Accordingly,
pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not promise or imply permanent or
guaranteed employment.
REPORT: I have not promised or implied permanent or guaranteed employment. I am
therefore reporting compliance.
3.8.3. With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity of the Town. Accordingly,
pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not establish current compensation
and benefits which deviate materially for the regional or professional market
for the skills employed:
REPORT: We have recently completed a full compensation and classification study to
insure that our current compensation and benefits do not deviate materially for the
regional or professional market for the skills employed. These adjustments were made
with the adoption of the 2014 budget. The only exception is our lack of provision of
spousal health insurance I am therefore reporting partial compliance.
3.8.4. With respect to employment, compensation, and benefits to employees,
consultants, contract workers and volunteers, the Town Administrator shall
not cause or allow jeopardy to fiscal integrity of the Town. Accordingly,
pertaining to paid workers, he or she may not establish deferred or long-term
compensation and benefits.
REPORT: I have not established deferred or long-term compensation and benefits.
I am therefore reporting compliance.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 8, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town
of Estes Park on the 8th of September 2015.
Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Wendy Koenig, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees John Ericson
Bob Holcomb
Ward Nelson
Ron Norris
John Phipps
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
Howell Wright/Western Heritage thanked the community, the local businesses and
Town staff for their support of the first Windows to the West Art Show. The show was a
success with 25 artists signed up for the 2016 show.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Norris stated Visit Estes Park staff would present the 2016 Operating Plan to
their Board on September 22, 2015 and deliver the final plan to the Town Board of
Trustees and the County Commissioners by September 30, 2015. Representatives
from each Board and staff met to discuss the roles of each entity and how they would
work together to support the Visitor Center, the Event Center and other areas in which
they overlap in providing service.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig recognized Western Heritage for their efforts in producing the
Rooftop Rodeo. The rodeo has been nominated for mid-size rodeo.
Trustee Phipps stated the Estes Valley Planning Commission would discuss
amendments to vacation rental regulations and zoning regulations at their upcoming
meeting.
Trustee Ericson commented the Transportation Advisory Committee would meet to
continue discussions on the Parking Master Plan. He congratulated Rocky Mountain
National Park on their 100th anniversary celebration and rededication of the park.
Mayor Pinkham also congratulated the Park on their anniversary.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Town staff and the citizen committee continue to conduct reference checks on the top
two Downtown Plan consultants and would bring forward the final selection for Board
consideration at the September 22, 2015 meeting.
The Creative Arts District has incorporated at the federal level and begun the process to
form a board. To qualify as an official district the Board must have a member of the
local government Board as a member. Board discussion followed and Trustee Nelson
was selected to serve as the Town Board representative.
Board of Trustees – September 8, 2015 – Page 2
The Town’s employee offsite parking program has been a success, especially on
Thursdays during the Farmer’s Market. The Town would continue the program next
year and may expand it to include other downtown businesses and their employees.
Administrator Lancaster and Public Works Director Muhonen attend the Upper Front
Range Regional Transportation meeting. The Town was awarded a $30,000 grant for a
dynamic messaging sign to direct traffic to parking areas. The funding requires a match
from the Town. Additional funding for a second sign may be available at a later date to
provide signs on both Hwy 34 and 36.
The Town has not received a formal response from the Central Federal Lands on the
Town’s proposal to include the third option, parking garage downtown, as an alternative
to the Downtown Estes Loop project. Staff anticipates a response within the next week.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated August 25, 2015 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated August 25, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development & Community Services Committee, August 27,
2015.
1. Resolution #14-15 Surprise Sidewalk Sale, October 10 and 11, 2015.
4. Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated August 6, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
5. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated July 28, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to approve the Consent Agenda
Items, and it passed unanimously.
2. REPORT AND DISCUSSION ITEMS (Outside Entities):
1. VISIT ESTES PARK UPDATE. WHERE WE ARE NOW. President & CEO
Fogarty provided an overview of Visit Estes Park’s (Local Market District)
activities over the past years including advertising and marketing efforts,
website, social media, destination product development, local tourism
partnerships, accountability and key indicators followed as an organizations.
The District has seen a 30% increase in the lodging tax through July and
lodging receipts up 23% over the same period. Why is the Town busier? Visit
Estes Park has employed marketing that resonates with guests. Are we at a
point of diminishing return with the marketing efforts? The District continues to
see substantial growth with the marketing efforts and would suggest there
would be potential for further growth.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ORDINANCE #12-15 ADD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.20 WILDLIFE
PROTECTION. Chief Kufeld presented Ordinance #12-15 creating Municipal
Code Chapter 7.20 Wildlife Protection. He stated the final draft was revised to
include changes suggested at the August 11, 2015 Town Board meeting. The
proposed Ordinance #12-15 is consistent with other local and mountain
community ordinances and enforceable.
Board of Trustees – September 8, 2015 – Page 3
Johanna Darden/Town citizen commented the proposed Ordinance was weak
and does not protect the wildlife. She stated bear proofing should be a
requirement in the valley for residents and visitors. The community needs a
stronger Ordinance to protect the bears.
Michael Whitley/Larimer County Planner stated as a member of the Bear Task
Force he supports the Ordinance. The Larimer County Commissioners
continue to support the Ordinance and would begin the public process to adopt
a similar ordinance in the county.
Attorney White read the ordinance. It was moved and seconded
(Norris/Holcomb) to approve Ordinance #12-15 and complete a review of
the Ordinance in a year, and it passed unanimously.
4. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to enter into Executive Session
for discussion of a personnel matter and not involving: any specific
employees who have requested discussion of the matter in open session;
any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of any person to
fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies that do not
require discussion of matters personal to particular employees., under
C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(f) – Police Patrol Personnel, and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 8:30 p.m.
Mayor Pinkham reconvened the meeting to open session at 9:40 p.m.
POLICE PATROL PERSONNEL COMPENSATION.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Ericson) to approve the revised market
comparison study for the sworn police patrol staff and the recommended
increase to the pay scale. Current sworn police patrol officers will receive up to a
15% increase effective August 30, 2015 and payable on September 18, 2015, and it
passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 9:41 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 8, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of
the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town
Hall in Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 8th day of
September, 2015.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps
Attending: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig, Trustees Ericson,
Holcomb, Nelson, Norris and Phipps
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Attorney White, Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
FINAL REVIEW OF 2016 STRATEGIC PLAN.
The Board reviewed an updated draft of the 2016 strategic plan and provided staff with
feedback related to changes and revisions. Town Administrator Lancaster remarked
that the new format of the document is easier to read and noted that highlighted projects
would either require additional funding in the 2016 budget, or may require additional
funding if the projects move forward to implementation.
Storm Water Master Plan and Feasibility of a Storm Water Utility – This is an
extensive project that would involve creation of a master plan and a model for a
storm water utility for Estes Park. Currently, the Town addresses drainage
issues on an individual basis, usually after damage has occurred, with repairs
taking place after a storm or flooding event. Staff noted that drainage is reviewed
during the implementation of projects, however, storm water and drainage is not
looked at as a “system” at this time. Town Administrator Lancaster said it is
difficult to separate storm water planning and transportation planning and
suggested storm water be a topic of discussion at a study session to provide an
opportunity to define a storm water utility and master plan and to identify how it
would be beneficial to the community. He noted that a storm water utility would
be a fee-based, self-supported enterprise fund and added that staff’s current
workload would prohibit this project from being done in-house.
Bond Park Improvements – The Board requested that this item be changed from
“Reevaluate and Implement Phase 5 of Bond Park Improvements” to
“Reevaluate Phase 5 of Bond Park Improvements”. The Board asked for
information about the status of Open Space funds as some of the monies have
been used for flood repair. Finance Officer McFarland will provide information on
the balance of the fund as well as identify how the funds have been utilized.
Develop plans for the Town’s 100th anniversary in 2017 – Staff suggested that
funds be budgeted in 2016 for planning purposes for recognition of the Town’s
100th anniversary in 2017. Mayor Pro Tem Koenig noted that research indicates
that an event such as this may provide as much as four years’ worth of economic
increase for the community with events scheduled in the year leading up to the
anniversary year and residual increases continuing for two years after the
anniversary year. She suggested seeking the assistance of people in the
community who have experience with this type of event. Town Administrator
Lancaster said that a planning committee will be formed in late 2015 and begin
meeting in early 2016.
Citizen’s Survey – This is a budgeted item for 2016. PIO Rusch noted that the
survey questions will be tweaked for 2016, and said that implementation of the
project will not require a large amount of staff time.
Document Management System – Staff proposed that IT funds be utilized to
conduct a needs assessment related to the acquisition and implementation of an
enterprise document management system. Discussion with Town Clerk
Town Board Study Session – September 8, 2015 – Page 2
Williamson is required in order to proceed with this project to answer questions
about the Town’s needs and requirements for such a system before moving
forward with the assessment.
Board of Appeals – A 5-7 year goal (included in item “e” under Outstanding
Community Services) speaks to encouraging the Board of Appeals to look at the
Town’s regulations and codes and give suggestions as it relates to economic
development. The Board requested that this sentence be identified as item “f”
under this category.
Resources – A 5-7 year goal will be added under Governmental Services and
Internal Support. Town Administrator Lancaster will re-word the current
language to clarify that the Board will be responsive to staffing needs in order to
provide the community with the level of service expected from the Town.
Transportation – Director Muhonen suggested changing item “b” to read “The
street rehabilitation efforts will result in an average pavement condition index of
70 or above for the Town street network by 2024.” The Board approved of the
change in wording.
Housing – The Board discussed the wording of the first 2016 objective in the
Outstanding Community Services category which specifically speaks to
“seasonal” housing needs. Trustee Nelson stated that he would prefer the Town
to focus on workforce housing, not specifically seasonal workforce housing.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig stated that in previous discussions the wording seasonal
workforce housing had been chosen since the Estes Park Housing Authority
(EPHA) and the Economic Development Corp. (EDC) are both working on
housing issues as well. She said “workforce” is too broad and that “seasonal” is
a subset of workforce housing. She said the Town’s role as a catalyst should be
to provide water and electricity, roads, and codes that are supportive of housing
development. The Mayor noted that the availability of housing is an issue for
people who provide essential services, such as police officers, school teachers,
and medical personnel and suggested that this is an issue for the school district,
fire district, and hospital district, as well. The Board discussed combining #1 and
#2, but chose to keep them as separate objectives. Town Administrator will
reword slightly to reflect the Board’s discussion and issues that interfere with the
development of seasonal workforce housing.
Neighborhood Plans – Trustee Phipps stated the Board should be sensitive to
the work that the Estes Valley Planning Commission (EVPC) has been doing
related to neighborhood plans and requested #3 under Outstanding Community
Services be reworded. He proposed the wording include that the Board consider
neighborhood development plans with the EVPC (after the conclusion of the
downtown neighborhood plan) be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan.
Town Administrator Lancaster will rework the wording of this item.
Additional comments included: show sensitivity to staff time and effort involved while
creating and prioritizing the strategic objectives and timetables; some of the objectives
create both financial and human resource concerns; and priorities may be easier set
during upcoming budget discussions. Related to the future study sessions agenda
items, Trustee Phipps requested that a study session be held related to defining the
Town’s role in economic development as it relates to the EDC, Visit Estes Park (VEP),
and other organizations. The Board requested that this item be placed in the “Items
Approved – Unscheduled” category. Additionally, Trustee Phipps proposed that the
agenda item for the September 22nd study session be changed to read: International
Property Maintenance Code (Dangerous Buildings Code) and new International Building
Code Discussion.
Mayor Pinkham recessed the meeting at 5:38 p.m. for a dinner break and resumed the
meeting at 5:49 p.m.
DISCUSS POSSIBLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEES.
Mallory Baker, Planning Consultant, has been working with the Community
Development Department to review and analyze the current revenue and expenses
Town Board Study Session – September 8, 2015 – Page 3
generated by the Planning Division and the Building Division. The current fee
schedules, which were last revised over ten years ago, cover approximately 34% of the
costs for Planning, and approximately 56% of the costs for Building. The Community
Development Department has devised three potential development review fee schedule
models for Planning, and three potential valuation and audit procedure models for
Building which will improve cost recovery and maintain fairness and equity among
different construction projects. Staff is requesting direction from the Board related to the
appropriate level of cost recovery for the Community Development Department, the type
of fee schedule the Board may be interested in adopting, and proposing that changes to
the fee schedule and/or model be effective January 2016.
The Planning models presented for consideration included:
Option 1: Traditional Fee Model (currently being utilized) – This model would
require the adoption of an updated version of the fee schedule based on a
defined level of expense coverage that would be determined by the Board.
o Advantages: Simple, standardized model; consistent with current fee
structure format.
o Disadvantages: No mechanism for accurate assessment of per-project
staff time; more complex projects are subsidized by smaller projects.
Option 2: Cost Reimbursement Model – This model tracks costs associated with
an application. A refundable cash deposit sufficient to cover the cost of
administration, inspections, publication of notices, public hearing expenses and
reproduction of materials would be collected from the applicant and staff would
track time and all expenses associated with the application. If costs exceed the
initial amount collected, a detailed invoice would be sent for the outstanding
balance. Any funds not expended would be refunded to the applicant upon
completion or termination of the project.
o Advantages: Development pays its own way; accurate assessment and
cost recovery per project; applicants have ability to reduce their review
fees by submitting complete, code-compliant applications.
o Disadvantage: More complex implementation.
Option 3: Combination Model – This model would require a cost reimbursement
structure for more involved, complex applications, with simpler applications being
assessed a flat fee.
o Advantages: Accurate assessment and cost recovery per project;
standardized fees for less complex projects; applicants have ability to
reduce their review fees by submitting complete, code-compliant
applications.
o Disadvantages: No mechanism to assess staff time for smaller projects;
more complex implementation.
The Building models presented for consideration included:
Option 1: Maintain existing system – The current permit valuation system would
continue.
o Advantage: No changes required.
o Disadvantages: No improvement in cost recovery; inequity among job
types.
Option 2: Utilization of the International Code Council Valuation System with the
Colorado Regional Cost Modifier of 0.99 – This model would use the most recent
International Code Council Building Valuation Data with the Colorado modifier to
estimate the value of building permit review projects.
o Advantages: Greater equity and uniformity for all construction and
development types; consistent with other Colorado communities.
o Disadvantages: More complex implementation than current system;
statewide modifier does not accurately reflect Estes Park’s construction
valuations.
Option 3: Locally-Based Assessment Model and Standardized Audit Procedure
– This model proposes the adoption of a per square foot calculation based on a
range provided by a pool of local contractors taking into consideration
Town Board Study Session – September 8, 2015 – Page 4
construction types typical to Estes Park such as custom, speculation, or log
home.
o Advantages: Improved cost recovery through accurate valuation; greater
equity across project types.
o Disadvantages: Requires feedback from stakeholders prior to
implementation; complex implementation.
Comments are summarized: development community has high expectations and
receives high level of service from Town staff; with the strengthening of the economy,
volume and expenses are increasing, however, fees have not changed; there is no
competition here compared to communities in the valley that are vying for development;
need to communicate with the stakeholders in the development community and give
examples of how to minimize and mitigate charges; cost reimbursement could end up
being less expensive than standard fees in some cases; learning curve for Planning is
the necessity for time-tracking and detailed invoicing, which will require training; there is
inequity in valuation of projects; valuations are not accurate when compared to actual
construction costs; Community Development Department is subsidized by the general
fund; the level of cost coverage is a policy decision; and development benefits the
community as a whole and community values are supported through planning.
The Board requested that staff provide examples of development and building projects
to illustrate how the proposed models would affect the fees charged to developers and
builders as compared with current development and building fee schedules.
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Due to a lack of time, this agenda item was not discussed. The topic will be included on
the next study session agenda.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Due to a lack of time, this agenda item was not discussed. The topic will be included on
the next study session agenda.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 10, 2015
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY/UTILITIES/PUBLIC
WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County,
Colorado. Meeting held in the Board Room of Town Hall in said Town of
Estes Park on the 10th day of September, 2015.
Committee: Chair Norris, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig and Trustee Nelson
Attending: Chair Norris, Mayor Pro Tem Koenig and Trustee Nelson
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Chief Kufeld, Director
Bergsten, Superintendent Lockhart, Managers Ash
McEachern and Lankamer and Recording Secretary
Limmiatis
Absent: Director Muhonen
Chair Norris called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
PUBLIC SAFETY.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Chief Kufeld informed the
Committee of the Longs Peak Scottish Irish Highland Festival parade would take
place on September 12, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. in downtown Estes Park and five
officers have been scheduled to staff the weekend event.
UTILITIES.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Light & Power Capital Project Change – Glen Haven Delayed and Allenspark
Advanced - Director Bergsten and Superintendent Lockhart updated the
Committee on the delay experienced on the Glen Haven Flood Recovery project
due to the need for a special use permit to traverse Triangle Mountain through
the Roosevelt National Forest. The Glen Haven project would be rescheduled for
completion at the end of 2016. In order to maximize productivity, the Light and
Power division would begin work on the Allenspark 2016 capital construction
project of placing the main line underground to reduce the frequent outages
experienced due to high wind and trees in a difficult terrain.
2. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Director Bergsten received contact
from a local business owner who recently installed LED lights throughout their
store and reported their costs and heat buildup decreased drastically. Bergsten
would like to invite Platte River Power Authority to speak to the public about the
new carbon dioxide regulations being administered by the Environmental
Protection Agency in an effort to increase energy efficiency. The Committee
recommended an insert be sent out with utility bills to inform customers of the
rebates being offered and the ability to request to use wind power at a surcharge.
Bergsten informed the Committee Estes Park is the only community that offers a
100% renewable option. Staff would take steps to publicize the options available
to citizens to reduce their carbon foot print.
Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee – September 10, 2015 – Page 2
PUBLIC WORKS.
ELM ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – STEWART
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS CHANGE ORDER. Manager Ash stated several
changes orders were presented by Stewart Environmental Consultants to attain
environmental compliance on Elm Road’s drainage. The scope of the original contract
was not well defined and monitoring and drilling had to be completed to fully define the
scope of services. The project has progressed and designs are now in place for the
drainage work. Staff is ready to go out for bid on the construction. The new total of
$184,654 for the services and fees provided was determined necessary and equitable
by staff. The Committee recommended approval of Change Orders 2 and 3 to the
professional services contract for the design of Elm Road Environmental
Improvement Plan be included on the Consent Agenda at the September 22, 2015
Town Board meeting.
DRY GULCH ROAD IMPROVEMENTS – FARNSWORTH GROUP CHANGE ORDER.
Manager Ash discussed the history of the Dry Gulch Road Improvement project. When
no bids were received in June 2015 for the construction, staff initiated conversations
with contractors to determine a favorable bidding package. Farnsworth Group was
instructed to make schedule and phasing modifications and re-bid the package which
resulted in two change orders totaling $172,482 for design services. This value
represents 9.2% of the estimated construction cost and is well within industry standards.
The Committee recommended approval of Change Orders 1 and 2 to the
professional services contract for the design of Dry Gulch Roadway Improvement
Project be included on the Consent Agenda at the September 22, 2015 Town
Board meeting.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Verbal Updates and Committee Questions – Manager McEachern informed the
Committee 1712 potholes and repairs have been completed since the purchase
of the pothole repair truck. The Streets division continues to work on Dry Gulch
Road until the rebuild begins. Public Works was able to contract work with
Larimer County to have pavement laid in 2015. Scott Avenue, Marys Lake Road
and Aspen Avenue would all see significant repairs by the end of 2015.
Manager Lankamer reported the Conference Center roof repair is approximately
72% complete and the contractor should meet the deadline of September 18,
2015. Lankamer would continue to work on staying within budget to repair the
interior damage to the Conference Center. Design options were received for the
Visitor Center restroom remodel and would be examined to find the best solution
for the budget.
There being no further business, Chair Norris adjourned the meeting at 8:30 a.m.
Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 19th, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Rooms 202 & 203 of Town
Hall, in said Town of Estes Park on the 19th day of August, 2015.
Present: Kimberly Campbell
Gregg Rounds
Stan Black
Bryon Holmes
Ann Finley
Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
John Ericson, Town Board Liaison
Master Police Officer (MPO) Greg Filsinger, Sr., Estes Park Police
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Belle Morris
Cory LaBianca
Amy Hamrick
Thom Widawski
Chair Campbell called the meeting to order at 12:03 p.m.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Public in attendance declined to comment.
Cory LaBianca has submitted her resignation to the Transportation Advisory Board.
Trustee Ericson said two Trustees would interview for the open position and he would
like to commence with advertisement to fill the position immediately. Chair Campbell
expressed intention of holding an officer election during the September meeting to
replace the co-chair position left vacant by Cory.
Approval of the July meeting minutes was postponed due to lack of a quorum.
No shuttle committee update was provided.
Chair Campbell reported that after contacting CDOT regarding traffic signal timing in
downtown Estes Park, she received a cordial reply from a CDOT official stating that no
signal adjustment would be considered for Estes Park in the next several months.
Transportation Advisory Board – August 19th, 2015 – Page 2
STAFF UPDATES ON TOWN PROJECTS
On August 18th, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the parking structure
design, with the condition that variable parking space sizes be provided. The design
team has strategized to provide three different parking space sizes inside and outside
the structure. The monumental staircase will be postponed until Phase II, but a cement
footer will be included in Phase I with a normal staircase built initially.
The Dry Gulch Road Improvements project will be rebid soon with modified bid
documents. Major changes to the bid package include an allowance of more
construction time; encouraging some winter construction be completed with primary
construction starting in late March 2016. The Town will be skin patching portions of the
road to make it safe for winter driving conditions.
The Fall River Trail Extension project will be presented to the Trustees at the Town
Board Study Session on August 25th. An option aligning the trail with Fall River Road
and another aligning the trail with Fish Hatchery Road will be presented for
consideration.
Fish Creek utilities repairs will be complete by November 2015. Right of way
agreements will take a considerable amount of time to complete, pushing permanent
repair construction to begin in late 2016 with completion in 2017.
Results from the Barnes Dance study on two major downtown intersections will be
available in November or December.
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY
Chair Campbell provided members with an updated parking strategy draft prior to the
meeting. Discussion focused on employee parking in the downtown corridor. With the
implementation of paid parking not on a schedule, the board feels a more immediate
solution should be in place to address downtown employee parking and create
incentives for employees to use the shuttle system. The board agreed that paid parking,
once implemented, will provide a uniform incentive throughout downtown and would
effectively address the employee parking problem.
MPO Greg Filsinger reported most parking permits issued for the downtown area are for
residents. He offered the perspective that business owners need to be the source for
meaningful implementation of any incentive program. A potential solution would be to
raise the occupational license fee for downtown businesses and then offer a
Transportation Advisory Board – August 19th, 2015 – Page 3
rebate/refund for tokens or punch cards turned in by employees/owners utilizing off-site
parking and shuttles.
MPO Filsinger recommended a paid parking option with a gated lot, allowing guests to
pay only for time they parked. This option would decrease the need for and expense of
enforcement. An incremental raise for each additional hour spent in the lot would
encourage turnover, with continuous rotation of parking resulting in increased revenue
and tax dollars and a more positive guest experience.
After listening to MPO Filsinger’s contribution to the discussion, the board feels
collaboration between the Town and downtown business owners could produce an
effective incentive program to address downtown employee parking.
Stan Black suggested three major causes of congestion in the downtown district were
due to vehicles traveling to the park or downtown district, the lack of downtown parking
causing vehicles to continuously circle while looking for a space, and the pedestrian
impact on traffic flow. Several members commented on the lack of value placed on the
pedestrian experience and subsequent solutions when discussing downtown traffic
congestion.
Trustee Ericson encouraged the board to set a deadline for producing and delivering a
tangible product to the Town Board regarding the master parking policy.
With no other business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 21st, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Parks Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park,
Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall Rooms 202 & 203, in said
Town of Estes Park on the 21st day of August, 2015.
Present: Merle Moore
Celine Lebeau
Dewain Lockwood
Terry Rustin
Ronna Boles
Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
Bob Holcomb, Trustee Liaison
Kevin McEachern, Public Works Operations Manager
Brian Berg, Parks Division Supervisor
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Two Board Vacancies
Chair Lebeau called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
GENERAL BUSINESS
It was moved and seconded (Lockwood/Boles) to approve the July 17th meeting
minutes, with minor amendments, and the motion passed unanimously.
Kristin Hill gave a presentation on the continuation of the art tiles lining the Highway 36
underpass tunnel along the Riverwalk. The project was started over ten years ago and
remains unfinished. The Estes Park Middle School art class has produced tile murals
that were sold to provide seed money to continue the project. A number of local entities,
schools and businesses are highly interested in supporting the project and would like to
make participation free. The tiles would be funded through local groups, supporters of
the art programs and possible grants, with the Town to pay for tile installation and
maintenance. The goal is to include the underpasses along Highway 36 by the dog park
and the Riverwalk. Artwork would make these underpasses more welcoming, colorful
and bright. The group would like to reignite the program and kick it off by installing
previously made tiles that are currently in storage. The possibility of murals was also
introduced to enhance the tile installation. The project would be continuous and growing
for years to come. Director Muhonen recommended a written agreement to sustain
longevity and provide clarification of parameters. A “champion” of the program should
also be identified to take the lead. Staff also remarked that both underpasses were in
CDOT’s right of way and an agreement with CDOT would have to be in place to
continue the project.
Parks Advisory Board – August 21st, 2015 – Page 2
PAB members discussed changing the meeting day and time to better accommodate
schedules and parking during the summer months. The board decided to hold off
selecting a new meeting time until new members are on board.
The Town is currently advertising for new members and has currently received one
application.
REVISIONS TO AIPP POLICIES
Brian Berg reported the issue of insurance was still unaddressed for loaned artwork.
Jackie Williamson was asked about town insurance and said she needed CIRSA to
review the AIPP policy. She advised a similar approach to the method the Museum
uses to insure artifacts on loan. The language in the AIPP policy and guidelines was
modified to reflect this change.
The question of where funds would come from for additional premium for insuring art
was addressed. The possibility of capping the liability or judging to accept high liability
on a case by case basis was also discussed. A motion was made, with one piece of
dissenting discussion, to amend policy with no insurance cap for loaned artwork
(Lebeau/Rustin) with all voting in favor.
Terry Rustin presented an example of how current inventory of Town-owned artwork
could be indexed on the web or in a document.
The local art district is putting together an art “trek” through the area, including galleries
in Town. Chair Lebeau suggested collaborating with this effort by including Town-owned
artwork.
With the meeting out of time, an agenda item was suggested for the next meeting to
discuss putting the AIPP policy and forms on the Town website.
A motion was made and seconded (Boles/Rustin) to adjourn the meeting at 12:03 pm,
with all voting in favor.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 1
August 18, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Betty Hull, Commissioners Doug Klink, Nancy Hills, Steve Murphree, Sharry
White, Russ Schneider, Michael Moon
Attending: Chair Hull, Commissioners Hills, Murphree, Schneider, White and Moon
Also Attending: Director Alison Chilcott, Planner Phil Kleisler, Town Board Liaison John Phipps,
Larimer County Liaison Michael Whitley, and Recording Secretary Karen
Thompson
Absent: Commissioner Klink
Chair Hull called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 15 people in
attendance. Each Commissioner was introduced. Chair Hull explained the process for accepting public
comment at today’s meeting. The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not
necessarily the chronological sequence.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
Candace Kane/ County resident spoke about the desire to rebuild a deck that was destroyed in
the 2013 floods. She explained in detail what the flood waters did to their property. Repairs to
the home were completed the end of 2013. Permanent sewer lines were installed in April, 2015.
She requested the Planning Commission to consider a three-year window for rebuilding. The
current time limit is one year.
Glenn Malpiede/Town resident is a member of a vacation home owner group. He is working with
two attorneys to provide a position statement and a white paper. After listening to the discussion
concerning vacation home rentals at the study session, he requested the Planning Commission
wait to make recommendations to the Town Board concerning vacation home regulations. His
group supports revised regulations and wants to work with the Planning Commission on them.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, July 21, 2015 Planning Commission meeting.
It was moved and seconded (White/Murphree) to approve the consent agenda as presented and
the motion passed unanimously with one absent.
3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015-04, ESTES PARK TRANSIT FACILITY & PARKING STRUCTURE, 500 Big
Thompson Avenue
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. The applicant, the Town of Estes Park, requests to
build a four story, 414 space parking structure on government land just south of the Estes Park
Visitor Center along Highway 36. In March, 2014, the Planning Commission approved a plan to
construct a parking structure along Highway 34 to the east of the Visitor Center. Since that time, it
has been determined the new proposed location would be a better fit for the structure by
achieving better access and fewer visual impacts. The applicant is requesting a Location and
Extent Review to move the structure across the river to the other side of the property.
Planner Kleisler stated the project would be built in two phases. Phase I would be the ground, or
surface, level and a second level. The site is bordered by the Big Thompson River and the Estes
Park Visitor Center to the north, the 9-hole golf course to the east (Federal land managed by the
Estes Valley Recreation and Park District), Highway 36 and single-family residential homes to the
down, and the downtown area to the west. The residential area is separated from the highway by
a steep slope. The building site is 2.6 acres. The existing parking lot has 94 parking spaces, and is
connected to the Visitor Center by two pedestrian bridges crossing the river. Those spaces would
remain. Traffic entering the proposed structure would travel in a counter-clockwise direction.
Planner Kleisler stated the application was reviewed for compliance with the Estes Valley
Comprehensive Plan and the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC). The Location and Extent
review is intended to provide an opportunity for review of the location and extent of specified
public facilities and uses sought to be construction or authorized within the Estes Valley. As with
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
August 18, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
all government agencies in the Estes Valley, the applicant may exempt itself from local zoning
regulations by a majority vote of the entire Town Board. The Planning Commission is the decision-
making body for this development plan. The applicant has also applied for several variances,
which will be heard by the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment on September 1, 2015 (pending the
outcome of this meeting). Setback and height variances will be reviewed.
Planner Kleisler stated the applicant is in negotiation with the Bureau of Reclamation (BoR) to use
a portion of their property to the east. Because federally owned land is technically not zoned, the
review process has been somewhat complicated. This project was reviewed using the standards
for the CD–Commercial Downtown zone district. He stated the applicant and the BoR are close to
making final decisions on the locations of the trail and golf cart path. If there are any minor
changes to the plans following the negotiations, reviews and approvals would be made at staff
level. Major changes would be brought back to the Planning Commission.
Planner Kleisler stated the proposed is as a Park and Ride Facility is a use by right in the CD zone
district. The plan attempts to limit grading disturbance by following the natural grade of the land
as much as possible. The plan proposes extensive landscaping (flower beds, shrubs and trees) at
the entryway to the structure. There is limited space available for screening along the spaces on
the west side. Roadside light poles and planters will meet the intent of the EVDC for street
frontage landscaping. The Town Parks Department will maintain the landscaping. All exterior
lighting will comply with the standards in the EVDC. Light poles on the top level will be
approximately 19 feet high (maximum height allowed is 25 feet).
The applicant has requested three minor modifications to the Off-Street Parking and Loading
Standards, as follows:
1. Location of Parking. Section 4.4.D.3, table 4-7 requires that off-street parking not be located
between the building line and the lot line in the CD zone district. In this case, a small handful
of surface parking spaces to the west and east of the building will be slightly in front of the
building line. The intent of the requirement is to maintain a “street wall” in the downtown
area.
2. One-way Drive Aisle Width. Section 7.11.K.2 requires a minimum driveway width of 15 feet for
large, non-residential uses. The ground level plan proposes a 14-foot one-way drive aisle
entering from the existing surface spaces on the west.
3. Stall Dimensions. As with the original submittal, the applicant proposes slightly shorter stall
lengths, which are generally consistent with industry best practices for parking structures. The
intent of the request is to help minimize the structure footprint, while still allowing for
comfortable movement within the structure. The applicant proposed the following
alterations: Stall Depth 17’9” (19’6” standard requirement), Stall Width 8’6” (9’0” standard
requirement, and Drive aisle 26’0” (24’0” standard requirement). Additionally, the smaller
stall depth will encourage drivers to drive further into the stall, thus keeping a wider drive
aisle for vehicles passing through. While the stall will be slightly shorter than the 19’6”
requirement, the total length will be more than the minimum required.
Planner Kleisler stated concern has been expressed by Commissioner Moon concerning the ability
of large vehicles (pickups and SUVs) to maneuver through the structure and fit into the spaces.
Planner Kleisler added some vehicles with rear bicycle racks or trailer hitches would possibly
extend into the drive aisle. The Commissioners would need to consider those issues when making
their decision.
Planner Kleisler stated the application was routed to affected agencies and adjacent property
owners for review and comment. The typical distance for neighbor notification is 500 feet;
however, notices for this project were sent to all property owners within 1500 feet of the site.
Additionally, a press release was published on July 31, 2015. As of August 6, no formal written
comments were received. One public comment was received late last week and was included in
the meeting material packets.
Staff Findings
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 3
August 18, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
1. If revised to comply with recommended conditions of approval, the application will comply
with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development Code, as described in the staff
report.
2. The application is consistent with the policies, goals and objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan.
3. Adequate services and facilities are available to serve the development.
4. The requested Minor Modification concerning the location of parking relieves practical
difficulties in developing the site.
5. The requested Minor Modification concerning the parking stall and driveway dimensions
results in more effective open space preservation.
6. The Planning Commission is the Decision-making Body.
Planner Kleisler stated staff recommended approval of the development plan, with conditions of
approval listed below.
Public Comment
Greg Muhonen/Public Works Director and applicant, thanked Planner Kleisler for his cooperation
with the project, saying the process has been a positive experience. Mr. Muhonen stated the
original project was put out to bid in November, 2014 and came back over budget. The previous
site proposal on the north side of the river (off of highway 34) required the ingress and egress
points for the shuttle services to be at a different location than private vehicles. There were
studies completed that indicated wait times for vehicles to turn left out of the parking structure
onto Highway 34 could be as long as 10 minutes. The original structure was designed to add 190
new parking spaces at final build out. The bid for the original project in November 2015 came in
over budget.
Today’s proposed structure moves to the other side of the river. The team looked at many issues
and alternatives to find an affordable alternative that met the grant funding requirements. If
located on the south side, it was determined 109 spaces could be provided in a two level
structure. If the structure is expanded to four levels, the structure could yield 311 new parking
spaces at a cost of $31K per stall, much less than the proposed cost across the river. The current
lot has 102 existing spaces (main lot and on the side). Phase I would add a second level and 109
spaces. Additional phases would bring the total to 413 spaces. There has been coordination with
the Estes Valley Recreation and Parks District to improve the separation between the structure
and the golf course. A fence would be installed between the structure and the golf course, and
berms would hide a cart path. A new service access road is proposed on the north and west side
of the structure to serve the existing landscaped island on the open west end would be removed
and improved for the Bureau of Reclamation’s needs for river maintenance as well as access for
emergency vehicles. An extension of the water main is planned to provide required fire hydrants
to the structure.
Director Muhonen stated the proposed landscaping would create an attractive entrance to the
Estes village. Landscaping will be completed and maintained by Town staff. He showed photo
simulations of the phased structure, stating the stair tower would be built with Phase II. The
Shuttle routes would not be changed; they would still enter and exit from the north lot. The view
of the Stanley Hotel would not be hindered, except for the 4.6 seconds it takes to drive by the
structure on Highway 36. He anticipates concern over the time it will take to turn left out of the
new lot. Several options are being researched, with a signal light being the last alternative due to
the cost. If traffic continues to increase as projected, a signal would be needed.
Director Muhonen described the need for the parking stall size modification request, which was
designed in an effort to find a compromise with the Recreation and Parks District to create a
definite separation between the structure and the trail/golf course. 24% of the proposed spaces
with Phase I are the same size as they are today (compliant with the Town standards). Spaces in
the parking structure itself will accommodate standard vehicles, but not extended cabs or
oversized vehicles. There are various alternative parking spaces in town that could accommodate
oversized vehicles.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
August 18, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Ginny McFarland/Town project manager reviewed the minor modification requests (1) the
proposed structure would encroach slightly into one setback owned by the Town, and another
owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. The goal is to create a compliant piece of land in the CD–
Commercial Downtown zone district. The structure will be right next to the street, as intended in
the EVDC. (2) One-Way Drive Width modification from 14 to 15. This would not change the level
of service of driveability as one enters the structure; (3) parking stall length and width
modification request is to reduce the overall stall length by 1.5 feet. The basis behind this minor
modification is to create a smaller building footprint, recognizing the sensitivity to the golf course.
Chair Hull commented on the tightness of the proposed stalls and was concerned about having
enough room to get in and out of the vehicles.
Anirudh Chopde/consultant with Walker Parking stated the stall size is based on parking
standards that have been established through over 50 years of research. The proposed stall size
would comply with national standards. It has been determined that the current proposal would
not allow enough room for large vehicles. If the spaces are made larger, we would lose 24 spaces.
Comments from discussion included, but were not limited to: eight surface spaces would remain
the same size as they are today; the Planning Commissioners would need to decide whether or
not the proposed number of spaces is a reasonable amount; Estes Park may have a larger number
of oversized vehicles that pull RVs; has there been discussion about a mix of different sized
parking spaces to accommodate large and compact sized spaces; signage could direct larger
vehicles to certain areas within the structure; the Town has applied for a grant to purchase
electronic signs that would be used to guide visitors to available parking spaces; the lighting plan
is compliant with the EVDC.
Public Comment
Paul Fishman/Town resident addressed concerns about left hand turns when the previous plan
was being considered. He was supportive of having left turns out of the proposed structure.
Concerning the stall size, he stated drivers of large vehicles have an expectation that they will
need to find alternative parking instead of using the structure. He suggested having westbound
shuttles leave from the proposed south lot. He would not agree that this parking structure would
be considered “downtown.”
Glenn Malpiede/Town resident supported the idea for directional signage to spaces that could
accommodate large vehicles and compact vehicles.
Public comment closed.
It was moved and seconded (Murphree/Hills) to approve the Estes Park Transit Facility and
Parking Structure Development Plan with findings and conditions recommended by staff, with
the addition of allowing for further study for mixed vehicle use (pertaining to size) and
additional signage and the motion passed with one absent.
Director Muhonen stated the Town will be applying for a grant to allow the construction of all
four levels as one phase.
4. REPORTS
A. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
1. Wilson Residence variance, Hummingbird Drive, was approved at a special Board
meeting on July 28, 2015. The lot was such that the size of the lot and the size of the
setbacks made the entire lot in setback.
B. Downtown Plan. Planner Kleisler reported the deadline for proposal submittals was
Wednesday. Eight proposals were received. A selection committee consisting of community
members, staff, reviewed each proposal in detail. Commissioner White was a member of
this selection committee. The consultants of the top two proposals would be interviewed,
with a formal recommendation tentatively schedule to go before the Town Board at the first
meeting in September. Following acceptance, staff would enter into a contract with the
consultants to begin the process.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 5
August 18, 2015
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
C. Vacation Home Update Process. Planner Kleisler reported information can be viewed at
www.estes.org/vacationrentals. A public meeting was held earlier this summer, and another
is scheduled for September 11th. The second meeting will include discussion of
recommendations that were refined following the first meeting. The Town Trustees will
hear recommendations on August 25th at the study session. Recommendations may include,
but are not limited to: occupancy limits, different fee structure, adding a county fee, how to
maintain residential character, contact with neighbors. The goal is to present the ordinance
in November and December, to be effective January, 2016.
D. Planner Kleisler reported the County Commissioners approved the cell tower on Prospect
mountain, and the applicant has applied for the building permit
E. Director Chilcott reported she presented “Zoning 101” to the Town Trustees at their last
study session. Zoning 101 is a brief overview of zoning basics, including the history of zoning,
an overview of our zoning code, and how it applies to our community. This was provided to
the Town Trustees to aid in their decision-making. She would be willing to provide the same
presentation at a future Planning Commission study session if the Commission so desired.
There was general consensus among the Commission to hear the presentation.
There being no further business, Chair Hull adjourned the meeting at 2:57 p.m.
___________________________________
Betty Hull, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
Visit Estes Park Presentation to Town Board2‐Part SeriesPart 1 ‐September 8, 2016: Where we are nowPart 2 ‐September 22, 2016: Where we are headed
Michael D. BodmanOffice ManagerMBodman@VisitEstesPark.comKellen ToulouseDigital Communications ManagerKToulouse@VisitEstesPark.comSuzy BlackhurstDirector of Operations & FinanceSBlackhurst@VisitEstesPark.comBrooke BurnhamDirector of PR & CommunicationsBBurnham@VisitEstesPark.comElizabeth FogartyPresident & CEOEFogarty@VisitEstesPark.comBecky GruhlPartner Development & Groups ManagerBGruhl@VisitEstesPark.com2016 Visit Estes Park StaffSeparate Social from WebsitePart Time Admin. or Intern
Jon Nicholas, Vice Chair‐CEO of Estes Park Economic Development Corp.Scott Webermeier, Treasurer –Owner / Operator National Park Village, which includes the Country Supermarket, Other Side Restaurant, Village Store, National Park Village Conoco, and EP Aerial Tramway Gifts. Lindsay Lamson‐Owner of Rocky Mountain Resorts. Estes Area Lodging Assoc. BoardSteve Kruger‐Manager of Solitude CabinsAdam Shake ‐Owner of Neanderthal Social Media, a consulting firm for social media marketing and communication in Estes Park. President of Estes Valley Partners for Commerce.Karen Ericson‐Owner / Operator of Serendipity Trading Company and Estes Park Self Storage. ****************************************************Also, Trustee Norris is Visit Estes Park ‐Town Board Liaison Kyle Patterson, RMNP Public Information Officer/Management SpecialistVisit Estes Park BoardBill Almond, Chair ‐Director of Reservations and Sales for the YMCA of the Rockies –Term expires 12/21/15
Tech‐savvy consumer in their 20s and 30s who highly values both person‐to‐person inspiration and sharing among their social network. That said, they are difficult to reach and convert. The Silent Traveler
Old Way•Impressions and Click Thru Rate %New Way –BIG Data•Confirmed hotel bookings•Average Daily Rate•Length of Stay•Average Occupancy•Behaviors•HobbiesThere are so many variables we can track now!BIGData
Impression = Ad ViewYou need 3758 Impressions before someone converts from CA or TX?You need 4259 Impressions before someone converts from CA or TX?Who spends more?Who stays longer?BIGData ‐2016
Mountain Bikers spend more or less than Road Cyclists?BIGData ‐2016
Mountain Climbers spend more or less than History Travelers?BIGData ‐2016
Americans are feeling bullish about their travel prospects in 2015 – 2016. International travel continues to grow as the world becomes smaller.Tourism is Booming
U.S. is a more expensive destination for international travelers,and equal with Cuba (a rising tourism destination hotspot).U.S. Challenge in Tourism
Personalization Is Even More Important
Experience Trumps Discounts
•Increase awareness of the destination•NPS 100thAnniversary•Ideal mountain base camp for low, medium, and high adventure travelers•Weddings•Adventure Travel•Group Travel•Family TravelPublic Relations 2016•Highway 34 Increase the collaboration with stakeholders on developing media‐friendly packages, specials and stories. Cross‐and Co‐Promotion – Honda Commercials
Website 2016•Web cams•Enhanced social integration •Content enhancement for optimal user experience•Video•Upgrades to Customer Relationship Management and Content Management System
Social Media 2016•Increase paid and organic reach•In‐market messaging•Fan‐generated, partner‐generated, and own content•Video
Social Media 2016Paid Twitter
Creative Assets
Outside MagazineKevin Franklin Reed kevin@inkwellbrew.comviavisitestespark.comJul 27I wanted to thank you and your hard‐working staff for all that you do to promote Estes. Of course we are used to Estes being busy in the summer, and yet… I’m in AWE at the number of visitors we have all over town this summer, and here in Inkwell. Our financial numbers are fantastic this summer. Thanks for working hard and making sure we don’t take summer traffic for granted, as a given.I wanted to take a moment to share this: I have had friends both in North Carolina (which was ‘home’ for many years before I moved to EP) and in Vermont who have mentioned seeing big, eye‐catching Estes Park ads in Outside Magazine. That is invaluable exposure! Very neat to get a text or email from folks that far off, who are thinking of our wonderful town.Thanks again.Kevin F ReedProprietor, Inkwell & BrewPurveyors of the Finest in Writing Implements * Journals * Cards * Coffee & Teainkwellbrew.com
Collatoral & Visitor Center 2016•Visitor Guide –New Improvements•Happenings –Posted around town at public restrooms•Touchscreens – In process•Portable Visitor Center –Farmers Market & More!
•Increasing budget for international markets.•Partner with stakeholders who wish to pursue additional business through international markets.•Expand digital content on our website –Custom content to speak directly to targeted markets.International Travel 2016
Outdoor Recreation
Rocky Mountain National Park•2 Parks in OneResource Protection and Conservation •Hike early / hike late•Weekdays in the fall•Emphasize winter and spring travel
Partnerships with the Town of Estes Park•Lodging Portal•Visitor Center•Ambassadors•Events•Event Complex•Event Websites•eNewsletter•Survey Data•Posted position on DMAI•Attend Town Meetings•Network on behalf of Sales & Mrktg. Manager at Conferences•Provide professional photos for Town collateral•Partner with Sales & Mrktg. when courting a prospective group•Meet with Town Staff and Trustees regularly•Short Term Vacation Rentals•VolunteerInvolved Partner –Solution Oriented
Estes Park Economic Development Corp. 2016Avalanche ReportEconomic Development impacts tourism, and tourism impacts economic development.Must have joint marketing missionsTourism is first date for investorsTravel & tourism is the 2nd‐fastest growing sector globally, with 3.9 percent per annum over the next ten years. Now the challenge is to get the right kind of talent to build for that growth. *Skift and US Travel Assoc.We must nurture an entrepreneurial environment that fits the brand of the destination.
•Front Range Travel Region –Craft brewery, history and scenic byway tours•Grand Lake•Colorado National Parks & Colorado Tourism Office•Met with partners at Governor’s Tourism Conference•dfdRegional Tourism 2016
State Tourism 2016•Most fit state in the country•Wellness Initiative•Most bike friendly state initiative = $100 million•Colorado Office of Economic Development & International Trade•Established Colorado Outdoor Recreation Industry Office; appointed Luis Benitez as Director
•Lodging•Restaurants•Retail•Activities•Blue Zone•Wellness Panel•Association Forum•Wellness CommitteeWellness Tourism 2016
Destination Marketing & Management Organization 2016Destination Product Development•Niagara FallsEvents CommitteeArts DistrictWellness CommitteeAmerica in BloomSports & Fitness CooperativeDowntown Business PartnersCommunity CenterShort Term Vaca RentalsWinter TrailsMuseumREI –Adventure Tourism Travel AssociationEALA, EVPC, EPWA
Destination Marketing & Management Organization 2016
U.S. ↔ Canada
Maxwell Inn is a small yet comfortable Inn, very well managed, clean with smaller but well equipped rooms. Our cozy room had newer furniture, tiled showers and bath rooms, flat screen TV, and was about a 5 min walk to town. We found the town of Estes Park to be sorely lacking good restaurants, and contained mostly tourist grabbing t shirt and trinket shops. Think Niagara falls. The town and its shopkeepers look very tired and Estes……We actually drove to Ft. Collins 25 miles away to find civilized shopping/restaurants our 2nd day of 3 in Estes. Maxwell Inn was however, a bright spot and a great location being only 4 miles from the entrance to Rock Mountain National Park.Stayed September 2015, traveled as a couplehttp://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUserReviews‐g60945‐d610533‐r311335285‐The_Maxwell_Inn‐Estes_Park_Colorado.html#TripAdvisor – Review 5 days ago, 9/17/15
September 22: Special Visit Estes Park Board Meeting.Visit Estes Park Board approved 2016 Operating Plan.September 30:Final Deadline to submit Operating Plan toTown of Estes Park & Larimer County CommissionersOctober 30(But no later than December 5):Town and County approval of Operating PlanOperating Plan Schedule:
Efogarty@VisitEstesPark.com970‐586‐0500THANK YOU!Please stay in touch with Visit Estes Parkand let’s partner together to enhance and enjoy our beautiful mountain village.Elizabeth Fogarty & TeamVisitEstesPark.com
RESOLUTION #15-15
ENDORSING THE ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT
BALLOT ISSUES 4C (TO COVER A PORTION OF THE COSTS OF OPERATING
AND MAINTAINING THE ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER) AND 4D (TO
CONSTRUCT, IMPROVE AND EQUIP THE ESTES VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER)
WHEREAS, The Estes Valley Recreation and Park District Board has
unanimously referred Ballot Issues 4C (to cover a portion of the costs of operating and
maintaining the Estes Valley Community Center) and 4D (to construct, improve and
equip the Estes Valley Community Center) to the voters of the Estes Valley Recreation
and Park District on the November 3, 2015 coordinated election ballot and;
WHEREAS, a 2014 voter-approved 1/4% sales tax serves as the Town of Estes
Park’s investment in the Estes Valley Community Center and provides for the
incorporation of the Town’s Senior Center and,
WHEREAS, this 1/4% sales tax will produce an estimated $5 million in revenue
before its sunset in 2024, which allows for a reduction in the amount of the Community
Center bond issues and their tax impact and;
WHEREAS, the Town of Estes Park, the Estes Park School District R-3, the
Estes Park Medical Center, the Estes Valley Public Library, and the Estes Valley
Recreation and Park District have partnered to address the need for year-round
community space that supports desired citizen programs and;
WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Community Center will improve the quality of life for
residents of all ages by providing multigenerational community and recreation space
and;
WHEREAS, the Estes Valley Community Center is critical to the continued
success of the Town’s Senior Services Division;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO to support and endorse Ballot Issues 4C and
4D.
DATED this day of 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
Ordinance #13-15 – Amending Municipal Code Section 2.08.010 - Committees - Adding the Audit
Committee as a Standing Committee.
Town Clerk Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: September 18, 2015
RE: Ordinance #13-15 – Amending Municipal Code Section 2.08.010 -
Committees - Adding the Audit Committee as a Standing Committee.
Objective:
To amend the Municipal Code adding a new standing committee to address Audit related issues.
Present Situation:
The Audit Committee was proposed by former Mayor John Baudek and formed by a Policy
Directive in February 2003 and consists of two representatives from the Board, the Finance
Officer, the Assistant Town Administrator, and the Town Administrator. The Town’s auditors and
the Committee agreed the structure of the committee should be changed to remove staff. The
function of the audit and the Committee is to ensure staff is in compliance with all established
regulations and procedures. Thus having staff on the Committee is inappropriate.
The Municipal Code Section 2.08.010 Committees outlines the standing committees for the
Town. At present three Town Board members serve on the Community
Development/Community Services Committee and the Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works
Committee.
Proposal:
At the August 25, 2015 Town Board Study Session staff recommended the removal of staff as
voting members on the Committee and adding the Committee as a Standing Committee. The
Committee would consist of three Board members with the adoption of the Ordinance.
Advantages:
To avoid conflicts of interest as it relates to staff participating on the Committee.
Disadvantages: None.
Action Recommended:
Approve the Audit Committee as a standing committee and amend the Municipal Code.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest. Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Ordinance #13-15.
1
ORDINANCE NO. 13-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 2.08.010
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, the Town Board of Trustees desires to update Section 2.08.010 of
the Municipal Code to add a standing committee;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS:
1. Section 2.08.010 Committees of the Municipal Code shall be amended to read
as follows:
At the first regular meeting following the certification of the results of each
biennial election, the Mayor shall appoint three (3) Trustees to the following
standing committees: Audit, Community Development/Community Service and
Public Safety/ Utilities/Public Works.
2. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its
adoption and publication.
Passed and adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park, Colorado
this _________ day of _______________, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
2
I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a meeting of
the Board of Trustees on the ________day of _____________, 2015 and published in a
newspaper of general publication in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on the
day of __________________, 2015.
Town Clerk